Results 1 to 3 of 3

Thread: Minor Alteration

  1. #1

    Minor Alteration

    In reviewing a set of logbooks I noticed the following regarding
    Aeroflash Signal Wingtip Strobes. "Installed on logbook entry as minor
    alteration. Installation of optional equipment system as per Beech
    Wiring Diagrams available from Factory"

    Does the IA stick out his neck in this situation? It is the opinion of
    the IA that recently did my Annual that these types of entries are
    within the authority of the IA. In his opinion Rosen visors can be
    installed with a similar sign off and the burden would then shift to
    the FAA to prove that it was not a minor alteration. His thought was
    even if the Rosens completely failed it would not in any way danger the
    mission. This is all logical but sometimes logic doesn't mean a thing
    with the FAA.

    Bob Palamara





    Join BAC today and be a part of the ONLY Type Club for the Musketeer series!

    www.beechaeroclub.org


    Yahoo! Groups Links

    <*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/musketeermail/

    <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    musketeermail-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

    <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

  2. #2

    Minor Alteration

    In a strict sense, altering from Grimes (?) lights to Aeroflash units
    or changing out the existing sunvisors to Rosen sunvisors SHOULD be
    classed as a minor alteration IF NO additional holes need to be
    drilled for new fasteners.

    HOWEVER, the FAA has rapped so many inspectors (FAA employees mostly)
    on the knuckles for approving some MINOR alterations that went way
    beyond reason that the FAA decided to really crack down. Now it
    seems that you need an STC for everything. If you want to sell it to
    somone else you also need a PMA to make it. (Sigh). This is one
    reason why more experimentals are certified than "production"
    airplanes and some really nice stuff is for "experimental aircraft
    only".

    I don't see sanity returning anytime soon.


    --- In musketeermail@yahoogroups.com, "bpalamara1" <bpalamara@...>
    wrote:
    >
    > In reviewing a set of logbooks I noticed the following regarding
    > Aeroflash Signal Wingtip Strobes. "Installed on logbook entry as
    minor
    > alteration. Installation of optional equipment system as per Beech
    > Wiring Diagrams available from Factory"
    >
    > Does the IA stick out his neck in this situation? It is the
    opinion of
    > the IA that recently did my Annual that these types of entries are
    > within the authority of the IA. In his opinion Rosen visors can be
    > installed with a similar sign off and the burden would then shift
    to
    > the FAA to prove that it was not a minor alteration. His thought
    was
    > even if the Rosens completely failed it would not in any way danger
    the
    > mission. This is all logical but sometimes logic doesn't mean a
    thing
    > with the FAA.
    >
    > Bob Palamara
    >







    Join BAC today and be a part of the ONLY Type Club for the Musketeer series!

    www.beechaeroclub.org


    Yahoo! Groups Links

    <*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/musketeermail/

    <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    musketeermail-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

    <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

  3. #3

    Minor Alteration

    >In reviewing a set of logbooks I noticed the following regarding
    >Aeroflash Signal Wingtip Strobes. "Installed on logbook entry as minor
    >alteration. Installation of optional equipment system as per Beech
    >Wiring Diagrams available from Factory"

    >Does the IA stick out his neck in this situation? It is the opinion of
    >the IA that recently did my Annual that these types of entries are
    >within the authority of the IA.

    I don't doubt that the WIRING is legal and within the suggestions in AC 43.13-1B Change 1, Acceptable Techniques and Practices. However the issue I was pointing out last week on the installation of strobe systems is that the LIGHT OUTPUT must meet the FAA's requirements (which have changed during the production run of the Musketeer series), and that the AeroFlash system does NOT meet the requirements for the later production planes.

    So YES they can be installed as a "minor alteration" (see FAR 43 appendix A for the list of items that are Major Alterations), but the light output is not considered in the type of alteration, and if it doesn't meet the FAA requirements for anti-collision lighting, then you are not able to fly the plane under the conditions that REQUIRE approved anti-collision lighting.

    > In his opinion Rosen visors can be installed with a similar sign off and the burden would then shift to
    >the FAA to prove that it was not a minor alteration.

    Its no "burden" for them. If the inspector wandering by your plane on the ramp doesn't like the installation of something, he can cite you, and its just like the cops and judge in Traffic Court, YOU have to prove your innocence after the cop says you were speeding. That is why you need approved data, because the lack of approved data is an instant win for them.

    >His thought was even if the Rosens completely failed it would not in any way danger the
    >mission. This is all logical but sometimes logic doesn't mean a thing with the FAA.

    If logic was all that was required, then we'd be much happier with the FAA.

    If you drill a hole in a structural part to mount your visor, then you have modified the structure, and will have to provide testing data to prove you aren't a safety risk for the ground pounders below your plane.

    If the visor can be mounted to something that isn't structure, then it won't be a big issue.

    As the FAA inspector told me when I got my IA: "Let's see how long you can KEEP it!"

    I've seen plenty of questionable mods done and signed off by mechanics. The owner will have no recourse when the FAA grounds the plane and pulls the mechanic's certificate(s) for unapproved alterations.

    The issue isn't always finding the mechanic that WILL sign off your desired mod, but in finding one that researches it and has the proper data to show that you won't later get busted.

    I know a mechanic that used to do "UPS Annuals" for $300. You mailed him the logs and the check for $300 and he'd sign off the plane. Eventually the FAA and the Courts caught up with him. But in the mean time he was making a pretty good living off his "inspections".

    --Bob Steward A&P IA (and happy to keep the certificates, even if it costs me jobs)
    Birmingham, AL


    Join BAC today and be a part of the ONLY Type Club for the Musketeer series!

    www.beechaeroclub.org


    Yahoo! Groups Links

    <*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/musketeermail/

    <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    musketeermail-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

    <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO